DOCSLIB.ORG

The Impact of Us Lng on Russian Natural Gas Export Policy

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Impact of Us Lng on Russian Natural Gas Export Policy THE IMPACT OF US LNG ON RUSSIAN NATURAL GAS EXPORT POLICY BY TATIANA MITROVA AND TIM BOERSMA DECEMBER 2018 ABOUT THE CENTER ON GLOBAL ENERGY POLICY The Center on Global Energy Policy provides independent, balanced, data-driven analysis to help policymakers navigate the complex world of energy. We approach energy as an economic, security, and environmental concern. And we draw on the resources of a world- class institution, faculty with real-world experience, and a location in the world’s finance and media capital. Visit us at www.energypolicy.columbia.edu @ColumbiaUenergy ABOUT THE SCHOOL OF INTERNATIONAL AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS SIPA’s mission is to empower people to serve the global public interest. Our goal is to foster economic growth, sustainable development, social progress, and democratic governance by educating public policy professionals, producing policy-related research, and conveying the results to the world. Based in New York City, with a student body that is 50 percent international and educational partners in cities around the world, SIPA is the most global of public policy schools. For more information, please visit www.sipa.columbia.edu THE IMPACT OF US LNG ON RUSSIAN NATURAL GAS EXPORT POLICY BY TATIANA MITROVA AND TIM BOERSMA DECEMBER 2018 1255 Amsterdam Ave New York NY 10027 www.energypolicy.columbia.edu @ColumbiaUenergy THE IMPACT OF US LNG ON RUSSIAN NATURAL GAS EXPORT POLICY ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS For comments on earlier drafts of this paper and editorial guidance, the authors would like to thank Jason Bordoff, Jonathan Elkind, Anna Galkina, Matthew Robinson, Morena Skalamera, Rik Komduur, and Megan Burak. All remaining errors are the authors’ own. The opinions expressed in this report should not be construed as reflecting the views of the Columbia SIPA Center on Global Energy Policy or any other entity. This work was made possible by support from the Center on Global Energy Policy. More information is available at: https://energypolicy.columbia.edu/about/mission. 3 | ­­ CENTER ON GLOBAL ENERGY POLICY | COLUMBIA SIPA THE IMPACT OF US LNG ON RUSSIAN NATURAL GAS EXPORT POLICY ABOUT THE AUTHORS Dr. Tatiana Mitrova is a Fellow at the Center on Global Energy Policy and the Director of the SKOLKOVO Energy Centre in Moscow. From 2011-2012, she was the head of global energy at the SKOLKOVO Energy Centre, responsible for analysis of the global energy market and the Russian Federation’s energy export and import policy. From 2006-2011, she was head of the Center for International Energy Markets Studies at Energy Research Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences, and since 2011 she is scientific director at Oil and Gas Department, . Dr. Tim Boersma is a Senior Research Scholar and Director of Global Natural Gas Markets at the Center on Global Energy Policy. Prior to joining CGEP, Boersma was a Fellow and Acting Director of the Energy Security and Climate Initiative at the Brookings Institution, and worked in the Dutch electricity sector. ENERGYPOLICY.COLUMBIA.EDU | DECEMBER 2018 ­­ | 4 THE IMPACT OF US LNG ON RUSSIAN NATURAL GAS EXPORT POLICY TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary 07 Introduction 09 Two Completely Different Types of Gas Market Organization 09 Russian and US Production and Export Volumes 10 Russia’s Role during the US Gas Deficit 12 The Current Impact of US LNG on Russian Gas Exports 14 Death of Shtokman Project and Delay of Yamal-LNG 15 The United States Creates Global LNG Glut 15 The US LNG Argument Became a Tool to Obtain Better Prices from Gazprom 18 Growing Pressure on Russia to Speed Up the New Pipeline Projects 18 Implications for the Domestic Russian Gas Market Framework 20 The Future Impact of Growing US LNG Supplies on Russian Gas Exports: Commercial, Geopolitical, and Institutional Competition 22 Direct Commercial Competition 22 European Market 22 Expectations of LNG Oversupply in Europe 22 Unique European Two-Segment Gas Market Model: Locked-in LTCs 23 Gazprom Secured the Biggest Portfolio of LTCs in Europe 25 Gazprom’s LTC Prolongation in Europe 26 Gazprom Selling at Spot 27 Volume in Europe Will Be Defined by LTCs 28 Long-Run Marginal Cost Competitiveness 28 SRMC Competitiveness 30 The Asian Market 32 Asian Buyers Are Looking for Risk Diversification 32 5 | ­­ CENTER ON GLOBAL ENERGY POLICY | COLUMBIA SIPA THE IMPACT OF US LNG ON RUSSIAN NATURAL GAS EXPORT POLICY LRMC and SRMC Competitiveness 33 Geopolitical Competition 34 Europe: Supporting European Energy Security or Marketing US LNG? 35 Asia: Who Will Tame the Dragon? 36 Fundamental Competition between the Two Institutional Systems 37 The Empire Strikes Back: Russia’s Potential Response and Gas Export Policy Scenarios 40 Potential Financial Consequences for Gazprom and the Russian Budget 40 Gazprom’s Strategy in Europe Will Depend on the Market Conjuncture: Asian Gas Demand and Oil Prices 40 No Change/Manipulation 42 Avoiding Competition 42 Adaptation and More Proactive Market Strategy 43 Adaptation/Price War 44 Conclusion 46 Bibliography 47 Notes 52 ENERGYPOLICY.COLUMBIA.EDU | DECEMBER 2018 | 6 THE IMPACT OF US LNG ON RUSSIAN NATURAL GAS EXPORT POLICY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The United States and Russia have long been the world’s largest natural gas producers, but they traditionally have not faced off in direct competition in that market. The United States was expected to become a net importer of natural gas, while Russia’s state-owned Gazprom took a prominent position in the European market. The boom in US shale-gas production changed that. While the United States had been trading gas regionally by pipeline for decades, the shale boom allowed for the export of US liquefied natural gas, putting the two gas giants in competition. Even before the first molecule of US LNG shipped, rising US production had diverted LNG destined for the United States into the European Union. Facing increased competition pushed Russia toward a more market-oriented strategy, with Gazprom adjusting its long-term oil-linked contracts that had previously been the backbone of Russian sales to European customers to use more hybrid formulae. This was just the beginning. After a slow start, the competition brought on by US gas is to a large extent shaping the Russian natural gas strategy in Europe and beyond. For Europe, rising gas competition from new suppliers has both economic and energy security implications. Globally, it is also raising questions about how Gazprom will compete in Asia, where demand is growing and gas suppliers are looking to place future production, as well as in other markets. Understanding how Gazprom will react to US gas is thus a critical economic and geopolitical question for LNG importers and exporters worldwide. In this paper the authors examine how Gazprom will maneuver in global markets under specific circumstances. It opens with a discussion of how the US and Russian gas sectors developed and interacted in the period before shale gas. The paper then examines how Gazprom’s gas trade has been impacted by new US production and what changes may be coming as US exports continue to increase. It finds that the advent of US LNG has already reduced Russian gas revenue, undermined its oil-linked pricing model, forced contract renegotiations and accelerated domestic gas market liberalization and LNG development. The authors argue that Russia is in a good position to defend its market share in Europe and looks at some of the strategies that could be pursued under various market scenarios, including the following: ● High Asian demand and low oil prices: If oil-linked gas prices were pushed below spot prices, Gazprom would not need to further adjust its pricing policy (as was the case in 2015–2017). In certain situations Gazprom might even limit supplies to drive prices up and increase its rent, becoming the price maker. Such a strategy would be utilized cautiously to avoid demand destruction and prompting new FIDs for new (US) liquefaction capacity. ● High Asian demand and high oil prices: In this scenario Gazprom’s position would be well served in the short to medium term by strong revenues. In the longer term, however, high prices will attract more competitors to the markets (and prompt new FIDs), so it is important for Gazprom to keep its own prices competitive and to keep the margin of the 7 | ­­ CENTER ON GLOBAL ENERGY POLICY | COLUMBIA SIPA THE IMPACT OF US LNG ON RUSSIAN NATURAL GAS EXPORT POLICY aggregators, which are supplying the European market, below their margin in Asia. There are already almost no “pure” oil-linked contracts left, and Gazprom in Europe mainly has hybrid pricing, but this scenario will require a more fundamental shift in the pricing, with the share of spot-indexed prices becoming dominant. ● Low Asian demand and low oil prices: Gazprom may be forced to keep prices for its long-term contracts below short-run marginal costs of US LNG. Gazprom might voluntarily move to completely spot-indexed prices, simultaneously trying not only to find new markets for its gas (both in Asia and in Europe) but also to stimulate new demand. The company would need more flexible and creative marketing, and it would seek to improve the efficiency of its operations, both internationally and domestically. Should Gazprom start to see its market share decline, Moscow could decide to liberalize the pipeline export monopoly, a decision that would make Novatek and Rosneft more powerful players. ● Low Asian demand and high oil prices: Russia would feel competitive pressure not only from the United States but also from all existing low-cost LNG suppliers like Qatar, which may have to switch to Europe and keep gas prices at a low level. Gazprom would have to engage in this price competition as well, flooding the market using spare capacities and driving the prices down to the level of its short-run marginal costs, which will disincentive US LNG aggregators to offtake their LNG.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Economics of the Nord Stream Pipeline System
    The Economics of the Nord Stream Pipeline System Chi Kong Chyong, Pierre Noël and David M. Reiner September 2010 CWPE 1051 & EPRG 1026 The Economics of the Nord Stream Pipeline System EPRG Working Paper 1026 Cambridge Working Paper in Economics 1051 Chi Kong Chyong, Pierre Noёl and David M. Reiner Abstract We calculate the total cost of building Nord Stream and compare its levelised unit transportation cost with the existing options to transport Russian gas to western Europe. We find that the unit cost of shipping through Nord Stream is clearly lower than using the Ukrainian route and is only slightly above shipping through the Yamal-Europe pipeline. Using a large-scale gas simulation model we find a positive economic value for Nord Stream under various scenarios of demand for Russian gas in Europe. We disaggregate the value of Nord Stream into project economics (cost advantage), strategic value (impact on Ukraine’s transit fee) and security of supply value (insurance against disruption of the Ukrainian transit corridor). The economic fundamentals account for the bulk of Nord Stream’s positive value in all our scenarios. Keywords Nord Stream, Russia, Europe, Ukraine, Natural gas, Pipeline, Gazprom JEL Classification L95, H43, C63 Contact [email protected] Publication September 2010 EPRG WORKING PAPER Financial Support ESRC TSEC 3 www.eprg.group.cam.ac.uk The Economics of the Nord Stream Pipeline System1 Chi Kong Chyong* Electricity Policy Research Group (EPRG), Judge Business School, University of Cambridge (PhD Candidate) Pierre Noёl EPRG, Judge Business School, University of Cambridge David M. Reiner EPRG, Judge Business School, University of Cambridge 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Exploration and Production
    2006-2009 Triennium Work Report October 2009 WORKING COMMITTEE 1: EXPLORATION AND PRODUCTION Chair: Vladimir Yakushev Russia 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction SG 1.1 “Remaining conventional world gas resources and technological challenges for their development” report SG 1.2 “Difficult reservoirs and unconventional natural gas resources” report 2 INTRODUCTION Reliable natural gas supply becomes more and more important for world energy sector development. Especially this is visible in regions, where old and sophisticated gas infrastructure is a considerable part of regional industry and its stable work is necessary for successful economy development. In the same time such regions often are already poor by conventional gas reserves or have no more such reserves. And there is need for searching new sources of natural gas. This is challenge for exploration and production of natural gas requiring reviewing strategies of their development in near future. The most important questions are: how much gas still we can get from mature areas (and by what means), and how much gas we can get from difficult reservoirs and unconventional gas sources? From this point of view IGU Working Committee 1 (Exploration and Production of Natural Gas) has established for the triennium 2006-2009 two Study Groups: “Remaining conventional world gas resources and technological challenges for their development” and “Difficult reservoirs and unconventional natural gas resources”. The purposes for the first Group study were to make definition of such important term now using in gas industry like “mature area”, to show current situation with reserves and production in mature areas and forecast of future development, situation with modern technologies of produced gas monetization, Arctic gas prospects, special attention was paid to large Shtokman project.
    [Show full text]
  • Germany - Regulatory Reform in Electricity, Gas, and Pharmacies 2004
    Germany - Regulatory Reform in Electricity, Gas, and Pharmacies 2004 The Review is one of a series of country reports carried out under the OECD’s Regulatory Reform Programme, in response to the 1997 mandate by OECD Ministers. This report on regulatory reform in electricity, gas and pharmacies in Germany was principally prepared by Ms. Sally Van Siclen for the OECD. OECD REVIEWS OF REGULATORY REFORM REGULATORY REFORM IN GERMANY ELECTRICITY, GAS, AND PHARMACIES -- PART I -- ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT © OECD (2004). All rights reserved. 1 ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT Pursuant to Article 1 of the Convention signed in Paris on 14th December 1960, and which came into force on 30th September 1961, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) shall promote policies designed: • to achieve the highest sustainable economic growth and employment and a rising standard of living in Member countries, while maintaining financial stability, and thus to contribute to the development of the world economy; • to contribute to sound economic expansion in Member as well as non-member countries in the process of economic development; and • to contribute to the expansion of world trade on a multilateral, non-discriminatory basis in accordance with international obligations. The original Member countries of the OECD are Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States. The following countries became Members subsequently through accession at the dates indicated hereafter: Japan (28th April 1964), Finland (28th January 1969), Australia (7th June 1971), New Zealand (29th May 1973), Mexico (18th May 1994), the Czech Republic (21st December 1995), Hungary (7th May 1996), Poland (22nd November 1996), Korea (12th December 1996) and the Slovak Republic (14th December 2000).
    [Show full text]
  • Nordstream: an Economic and Market Analysis of the North European Pipeline Project
    Riley, Nordstream: An Economic and Market Analysis of the North European Pipeline Project Nordstream: An Economic and Market Analysis of the North European Pipeline Project Professor Dr. Alan Riley, City Law School, City University, London & Associate Research Fellow, Centre for European Policy Studies, Brussels. 1.0 Introduction Most of the critical discussion in relation to the Nordstream project have focussed upon environmental concerns for example, the construction of the pipelines through the WWII munitions dumps in the Gulf of Finland.1 This paper takes a different approach. It instead examines the underlying economics and market context in which Nordstream will operate. It argues that the cost of Nordstream is already substantially more expensive than land based pipelines and that the costs of building the pipeline are likely to grow.2 As a consequence if the German domestic market remains substantially closed to competition German consumers particularly will face very high prices for Nordstream sourced gas. However, this paper argues that consumers are likely to be offered relief as a result of competition created by EU gas market liberalisation. The paper then argues that rather than consumers facing economic damage, it will instead be the shareholders in Nordstream, Gazprom, Gasuunie, EON and BASF who are likely to suffer3 The impact of gas market liberalisation will be to permit cheaper land based piped gas from alternative sources, for instance from the new British gas hub to flow into Germany and the rest of Europe undercutting Nordstream sourced gas and forcing Nordstream to exit the market. 1 Lips, Possible Environmental` Impacts of the Nordstream Project (2007) Presentation at the Nordstream Project Conference, (February 2007) Vilnius.
    [Show full text]
  • Implementation of the Shtokman Project Is the Launch of Hydrocarbon Reserves Development of the Russian Arctic Shelf A. Y. Mand
    Implementation of the Shtokman Project is the launch of Hydrocarbon Reserves Development of the Russian Arctic Shelf A. Y. Mandel – General Director of OOO Gazprom Dobycha Shelf The depletion of the onshore oil and gas reserves causes the necessity of rapid development of the hydrocarbon fields on the World Ocean s helf. The Russian Federation has the longest continental shelf in the world. As estimated by Russian and western geologists, the greater part of the shelf bears the potential of prospective oil and gas reserves. Above all, it holds true for the Russian Arctic shelf, though only 10% of the required geological information is a vailable. Meanwhile, several unique large oil and gas fields have been discovered in this part of the World Ocean so far; the evaluation has been made of hydrocarbon reserves of some fields in the Barents Sea, the Kara Sea, the East Siberian Sea and others in this re gion. The total estimated hydrocarbon reserves on the Russian Arctic Shelf amount to approx. 18% of their volume on the shelf of the World Ocean. For the last few years OAO Gazprom has intensified the activities on the development of the oil and gas fields on the continental shelf of the Russian Arctic Shelf. The Prirazlomnoye, Shtokman and some other fields of the Obskaya and Tazovskaya Bays are among the top-priority projects to be brought on stream from 2010 to 2020. The Shtokman gas condensate field is the largest and, therefore, the most promising field regarding the determination of the Russian gas development strategy for 50 years ahead.
    [Show full text]
  • The Future of Energy and the Case of the Arctic Offshore: the Role of Strategic Management
    Journal of Marine Science and Engineering Article The Future of Energy and the Case of the Arctic Offshore: The Role of Strategic Management Elias G. Carayannis 1, Alina Ilinova 2,* and Alexey Cherepovitsyn 2 1 School of Business, George Washington University, Washington, DC 20052, USA; [email protected] 2 Organization and Management Department, Saint-Petersburg Mining University, 199106 Saint-Petersburg, Russia; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +7-921-349-3472 Abstract: As risk and uncertainty factors have become more prominent in the already volatile energy market because of the COVID-19 pandemic, the development of Arctic hydrocarbon resources has become a debatable issue. At any rate, oil and gas companies need to improve their strategic manage- ment systems (along with the development of technologies) for the successful implementation of such complex projects. The purpose of this study was to propose the conceptual basis for transforming strategic management and planning systems of oil and gas companies so that they can successfully face global challenges when implementing offshore oil and gas projects in the Arctic as well as provide more sustainable energy sources. The article discusses the current situation with Arctic initiatives and the results of an analysis of price instability in the energy sector, along with an analysis of several megatrends affecting oil and gas companies. All this allows for presenting a conceptual vision of how a strategic management system should be transformed in order to become able to meet the requirements for implementing Arctic projects, with the emphasis being placed on sustainability, management requirements, and the key principles.
    [Show full text]
  • Petroleum Activity in the Russian Barents Sea
    FNI Report 7/2008 Petroleum Activity in the Russian Barents Sea Constraints and Options for Norwegian Offshore and Shipping Companies Arild Moe and Lars Rowe Petroleum Activity in the Russian Barents Sea Constraints and Options for Norwegian Offshore and Shipping Companies Arild Moe and Lars Rowe [email protected] – [email protected] Report commissioned by the Norwegian Shipowners’ Association September 2008 Copyright © Fridtjof Nansen Institute 2008 Title Petroleum Activity in the Russian Barents Sea: Constraints and Options for Norwegian Offshore and Shipping Companies Publication Type and Number Pages FNI-Report 7/2008 26 Authors ISBN Arild Moe and Lars Rowe 978-82-7613-530-5-print version 978-82-7613-531-2-electronic version Project ISSN 0879 1504-9744 Abstract Presently most attention in the Barents Sea is given to the Shtokman project. Experience from development of this field, where there are still many uncertainties, will have large consequences for the further development program and relations with foreign companies. The exploration activity going on is fairly limited, but over the last few years there has been a struggle over licenses and control over exploration capacity. In the medium term the goal of rapid development of the Arctic continental shelf has become intertwined with a comprehensive government effort to modernise the domestic shipbuilding industry to make it able to cover most of the needs offshore. With the shipbuilding industry in a deep crisis these goals are not fully reconcilable. Russia will either have to accept more foreign involvement, or scale down its offshore ambitions. We believe a combination of the two alternatives is likely.
    [Show full text]
  • E.ON 2003 Annual Report
    Financial Calendar 2003 Annual Report E.ON Group Financial Highlights in millions 2003 20021 +/– % Electricity sales volume (in billion kWh)2 387.6 333.6 +16 Gas sales volume (in billion kWh)2 803.7 721.3 +11 April 28, 2004 2004 Annual Shareholders Meeting Sales 46,364 36,624 +27 April 29, 2004 Dividend Payment EBITDA3 9,458 7,558 +25 EBIT3 6,228 4,649 +34 May 13, 2004 Interim Report: January–March 2004 Internal operating profit4 4,565 3,817 +20 Income/(loss) from continuing operations August 12, 2004 Interim Report: January–June 2004 before income taxes and minority interests 5,538 –759 – November 11, 2004 Interim Report: January–September 2004 Income/(loss) from continuing operations 3,950 –720 – Income/(loss) from discontinued operations 1,137 3,306 –66 March 10, 2005 Annual Press Conference, Net income 4,647 2,777 +67 Release of 2004 Annual Report Investments 9,196 24,159 –62 Cash provided by operating activities 5,538 3,614 +53 March 10, 2005 Annual Analysts Conference Stockholders’ equity 29,774 25,653 +16 Total assets 111,850 113,503 –1 April 27, 2005 2005 Annual Shareholders Meeting ROCE6 (in %) 9.9 9.2 +0.75 Cost of capital (in %) 9.5 9.5 – Return on equity after taxes7 (in %) 16.8 11.1 5.75 Employees at year end 66,549 101,336 –34 Earnings per share from (in ) on•top continuing operations 6.04 –1.10 – discontinued operations 1.74 5.07 –66 cumulative effect of changes in accounting principles, net –0.67 0.29 – net income 7.11 4.26 +67 2003 Annual Report Per share (in ) Dividend 2.00 1.75 +14 Stockholders’ equity8 45.39 39.33 +15 1Adjusted for discontinued operations (see commentary on pages 133–141).
    [Show full text]
  • Gazprom: Gas Giant Under Strain
    Gazprom: Gas Giant Under Strain Nadejda Makarova Victor Working Paper #71 January 2008 The Program on Energy and Sustainable Development at Stanford University is an interdisciplinary research program focused on the economic and environmental consequences of global energy consumption. Its studies examine the development of global natural gas markets, the role of national oil companies, reform of electric power markets, international climate policy, and how the availability of modern energy services, such as electricity, can affect the process of economic growth in the world’s poorest regions. The Program, established in September 2001, includes a global network of scholars—based at centers of excellence on five continents—in law, political science, economics and engineering. It is based at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies. Program on Energy and Sustainable Development Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies Encina Hall East, Room E415 Stanford University Stanford, CA 94305-6055 http://pesd.stanford.edu About the National Oil Company Study While the role of the state is declining in nearly every sector of world economic activity, in hydrocarbons the pattern is quite different. State-controlled oil companies—so-called national oil companies (NOCs)— remain firmly in control over the vast majority of the world's hydrocarbon resources. Some NOCs are singular in their control over their home market; others engage in various joint ventures or are exposed to competition. PESD’s study on National Oil Companies focuses on fifteen NOCs: Saudi Aramco, NIOC (National Iranian Oil Co), KPC (Kuwait Petroleum Co), PDVSA (Petróleos de Venezuela) , ADNOC (Abu Dhabi National Oil Company), NNPC (Nigerian National Petroleum Co), PEMEX, Gazprom , Sonatrach, CNPC, Petrobras, Petronas, ONGC, Sonangol, and Statoil.
    [Show full text]
  • CASE AT.39767 – E.ON GAS ANTITRUST PROCEDURE Council Regulation
    CASE AT.39767 – E.ON GAS (Only the English text is authentic) ANTITRUST PROCEDURE Council Regulation (EC) 1/2003 Article 9 Regulation (EC) 1/2003 Date: 26/07/2016 This text is made available for information purposes only. A summary of this decision is published in all EU languages in the Official Journal of the European Union. Parts of this text have been edited to ensure that confidential information is not disclosed. Those parts are replaced by a non-confidential summary in square brackets or are shown as […]. EN EN TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................... 3 2. Review of the Commitments on the Basis of Article 9(2) of Regulation No 1/2003 ... 5 3. Relevant market ............................................................................................................ 6 3.1. Gas wholesale markets .................................................................................................. 6 3.1.1. Relevant product market ............................................................................................... 6 3.1.2. Relevant geographic market ......................................................................................... 7 3.2. Gas retail market ........................................................................................................... 8 3.2.1. Relevant product market ............................................................................................... 8 3.2.2. Relevant geographic
    [Show full text]
  • International Energy Outlook 2013 Was Prepared by the U.S
    Contacts The International Energy Outlook 2013 was prepared by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) under the direction of John Conti, Assistant Administrator for Energy Analysis ([email protected], 202-586-2222); Paul Holtberg, Team Leader, Analysis Integration Team ([email protected], 202-586-1284); Joseph A. Beamon, Director, Office of Electricity, Coal, Nuclear, and Renewables Analysis ([email protected], 202-586-2025); Sam Napolitano, Director, Office of Integrated and International Energy Analysis ([email protected], 202-586-0687); A. Michael Schaal, Director, Office of Petroleum, Natural Gas, and Biofuels Analysis ([email protected], 202-586-5590); James T. Turnure, Director, Office of Energy Consumption and Efficiency Analysis ([email protected], 202-586-1762); and Lynn Westfall, Director, Office of Energy Markets and Financial Analysis ([email protected], 202-586-3811). Specific questions about the report should be referred to Linda E. Doman ([email protected], 202-586-1041) or the following analysts: World energy demand and economic outlook ..................................... Linda E. Doman ([email protected], 202-586-1041) Macroeconomic assumptions .............. Vipin Arora ([email protected], 202-586-1048) Liquid fuels ......................................................... Alexander Metelitsa ([email protected], 202-586-0333) Michael Leahy ([email protected], 202-287-6329) Natural gas ......................................................... Justine L. Barden
    [Show full text]
  • Nord Stream: Not Just a Pipeline
    FNI Report 15/2008 Nord Stream: Not Just a Pipeline An analysis of the political debates in the Baltic Sea region regarding the planned gas pipeline from Russia to Germany Bendik Solum Whist Nord Stream: Not Just a Pipeline An analysis of the political debates in the Baltic Sea Region regarding the planned gas pipeline from Russia to Germany Bendik Solum Whist [email protected] November 2008 Copyright © Fridtjof Nansen Institute 2008 Title: Nord Stream: Not Just a Pipeline. An analysis of the political debates in the Baltic Sea region regarding the planned gas pipeline from Russia to Germany Publication Type and Number Pages FNI Report 15/2008 79 Author ISBN Bendik Solum Whist 978-82-7613-546-6-print version 978-82-7613-547-3-online version Project ISSN 1504-9744 Abstract This report is an analysis of the planned gas pipeline from Russia to Germany through the Baltic Sea known as Nord Stream. Although not yet realised, the project has, since its birth, been the subject of harsh criticism and opposition by a significant number of states that consider themselves affected by the pipeline. Whereas the Baltic States and Poland have interpreted the pipeline as a political- ly motivated strategy that will increase Russia’s leverage on them and threaten their energy security, the debate in Sweden was at first mostly concerned with the prospect of increased Russian military presence in the Swedish Exclusive Economic Zone. The potential environmental impact of the pipeline has been, and continues to be, an overarching concern shared by all the littoral states of the Baltic Sea.
    [Show full text]